@Uncrustable:
Updated OP
Changed Allies to:Allies. USAPac + USAEur + UK + France + China + Common Wealth Dominions (ANZAC, SAfrica, SWAfrica, Canada)
All South American gains go to Atlantic USA.
All Pacific islands gained go to Pacific USA, with the exception of all the Dutch islands and New guinea. (both to UK)
All other Pacific gains go to Pacific UK
All other Europe gains go to Europe UK
Movement restrictions for China does not change from OOBOkay, I’m getting confused again. I see that you are combining UK Europe and UK Pacific into a single UK, and you are adding the new Commonwealth (ANZAC, South Africa, SW Africa and Canada). However, you didn’t change where the gains go to.
Wouldn’t any Pacific gains go to the Commonwealth now?
Perhaps any gains on the mainland go to UK, and the Dutch islands go to Commonwealth.
What about gains in Africa?Also, this is just a comment, I think it’s weird that you split the US economy. That will take some getting used to. What about the US NOs? I would guess that the $10 for controlling EUS, CUS and WUS would go to US Atlantic, and the one for Mexico, SE Mexico, Central America and West Indies also go to US Atlantic.
The one for Philippines and the one for Alaska, Aleutians, Hawaii, Line and Johnston Islands would both go to USA Pacific, right?
Sorry didn’t mention, split USA as it was OOB the first G40
-it is meant for balance, and forces some but of realism
I fell UK Gould get the income
But Dutch islands to commonwealth could work
Updated OP
Allies: UK + USA + France + China + Canada + ANZAC
USA income must be split 50/50 between Europe and Pacific boards.
UK income is not split.
Also added color suggestions.
Testing this now.
We started a game using this idea yesterday. Got through the first round. Very interesting concept.
Japan DOW J1 so the US is in the conflict along with the rest of the Western Allies. Russia is still neutral on both boards right now.
For the Allies, it got a little confusing moving all of them at the same time. However, there were definite benefits in certain battles. They were able to hit the Axis in a number of places that weren’t wholly expected. One particular battle involved a Commonwealth (ANZAC) destroyer, British planes and US planes and cruiser attacking 2 German subs in SZ 91. It was really neat having all those different Allied pieces in the same attack.
The biggest winner with this new style was definitely Italy. Since they now move with Germany, and BEFORE the UK, Italy managed to sink the French and British fleets in the Med, wiped out the Alexandria force, took Egypt and has a strong grasp in Central Africa. They lost their sub and 2 destroyers but still have their battleship, both cruisers and all their air left. I think they will be able to grow through Africa pretty quick unless the Allies can do something to check them.
Most of the rest seems to be going just about the same as most regular games of Global. Of course it’s just the first round. Look forward to seeing how things work out in later rounds.
By the way Uncrustable, I know you said to have the US split 50/50 but I altered that a little. The Pacific side gets all the IPCs from that side of the board plus 1/2 of Central US. The Europe side gets all the IPCs from that side minus 1/2 of Central US. That leaves the US Pacific starting with 23 and US Europe starting with 29. However, the US Pacific actually has more NO money available so it about evens out.
I’ve been advocating this 4 power split for years now.
I would add that China should be split between Communist (USSR), Nationalist (western Allies) and Collaborationist (Japanese) forces, with only infantry ever being built in China.
Incidentally, the “red”, & “green” Chinese can fight each other (within China) without causing war between the Western Allies and the Soviets. Similarly they can each fight the Japanese without causing war with that block.
USSR and Japan were not at war until after Hiroshima; it could be argued that the USSR and the Axis were allies until June 1941. But there need be no official alliances between the 4 blocks. Maybe something to prevent a 3 on 1 ganging up? Also, a power cannot call off a war with another block once fighting has started; it is still always a fight to the finish.
What would be your setup changes flash?
Your china idea seems interesting but I worry it would just complicate the game for little impact. Plus require additional playing peices. It should be playable OOB
I’ve been advocating this 4 power split for years now.
I would add that China should be split between Communist (USSR), Nationalist (western Allies) and Collaborationist (Japanese) forces, with only infantry ever being built in China.
Incidentally, the “red”, & “green” Chinese can fight each other (within China) without causing war between the Western Allies and the Soviets. Similarly they can each fight the Japanese without causing war with that block.USSR and Japan were not at war until after Hiroshima; it could be argued that the USSR and the Axis were allies until June 1941. But there need be no official alliances between the 4 blocks. Maybe something to prevent a 3 on 1 ganging up? Also, a power cannot call off a war with another block once fighting has started; it is still always a fight to the finish.
Two parties can always call an agreed upon truce. Or you could call and agree to limited wars. (I will only fight your troops in these territories, and you can fight mine in them, if it spills over there are repurcussions). Global 39 has a proxy war over finland that is cause for entertainment.
As for 3 ganging up on 1, it doesn’t happen, because chances are that 1/3 will become so powerful, that 2/3 and 3/3 will want to prevent 1/1 from being eliminated to keep the balance of power.
FFA games, tend to balance themselves to a degree. The only requirement is that you impost a time limit (20 turns) so as to force players to fight, hungergames style.
If you allow 2 powers to call a truce, isn’t there a danger it will just become a game of gang up on the leader to stop any one player becoming too powerful?
Stalin toyed with the idea of an armistice with Hitler at one point, but the nature of the regimes involved was such that its really unhistorical.
Also needed:
If A is at war with B and C then B & C cannot declare war on each other until A is eliminated.
So that, for example, if the Western Allies had sent troops to fight the Soviets in Finland (which very nearly happened) then Germany would not be allowed to attack Russia (or visa versa) until the Western Allies had been defeated.
You can easily improvise Chinese pieces; you really only need infantry for the Communists (Russian pieces from another version). For collaborationists just treat them like any other Japanese infantry piece once placed.
Treating China as a united country makes it more of a problem for the Japanese than it really was; but if only infantry can be raised then of course the warfare is pretty static as it should be.
This is not meant to be FFA, neither would I have any interest in FFA
Allies and Russia vs Euro Axis and Japan
